Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
But still, I think Jobs's goal was a building that forced people to interact with coworkers, so the need to walk a long distance through other departements' halls is a feature, not a bug. Accidental collaboration, or something like that. It's based on his experience of seeing great ideas originate in places like the cafeteria.

I guess I agree. Where I work we have a giant (mostly) open office. Everyone knows everyone else. I've learned a lot about every aspect of the projects I work on, so that's pretty cool.

One great practical reason to make a ring-shaped building is it maximizes the number of rooms with windows. I mean, that's true of any courtyard building really. Having natural light is really nice, even when it's obscured by shades or blinds. I'm a big fan of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: manu chao
And with many other large office buildings/complexes scattered throughout the SF Bay Area. And beyond.

Going back just 11 years, Apple had 14.8K employees. Today they have 120K, with roughly half in retail.

Unless you have inside information about Apples current situation and especially their plans for the future, I don't understand how you can even remotely judge what Apple's facilities needs are.

My point is that you don't need dazzling HQ architecture to do incredible things as a company. I never "judged" their facility needs, either.

One more thing...you're bold-lock is stuck. ;)
 
Sure, you could house any company in a cheap tilt-up building. lol maybe a stockholder here is angry that apple isn't doing the bare minimum legally required to get their products made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alexmarchuk
One great practical reason to make a ring-shaped building is it maximizes the number of rooms with windows.

That would be my personal number one reason to like working there. The main thing I hate about working long hours, especially in the winter, is that I never see the sun. It's depressing, with real biological mechanisms at play.

Apple employees certainly put in the hours, so I'll bet many look forward to windowed rooms. Well, except the Mac teams, those poor bastards will be stuck in the basement!
[doublepost=1472844255][/doublepost]
Sure, you could house any company in a cheap tilt-up building. lol maybe a stockholder here is angry that apple isn't doing the bare minimum legally required to get their products made.

You don't do nuance, do you?
 
Depends on what you mean with "Moore's Law". That transistors keep getting smaller or that they keep getting smaller on fairly constant schedule? They still keep getting smaller but the cadence of this has slowed.
I believe it was the point of the transistors getting to a certain point, and yes, it is slowing but my point to the OP, who said it was over, is wrong.
 
I believe it was the point of the transistors getting to a certain point, and yes, it is slowing but my point to the OP, who said it was over, is wrong.

I thought Moore's law stated transistor density on ICs was supposed to double every 18 months, but I just looked it up and it appears to be a rather malleable law. Moore himself laid it out as doubling every 12 months, then it was changed to 18 months, and now some sources say every 24 months.

In any event my point was that IC transistor density does not increase at the same pace as previously. Obviously I shouldn't have brought Moore's law into it!
 
I thought Moore's law stated transistor density on ICs was supposed to double every 18 months, but I just looked it up and it appears to be a rather malleable law. Moore himself laid it out as doubling every 12 months, then it was changed to 18 months, and now some sources say every 24 months.

In any event my point was that IC transistor density does not increase at the same pace as previously. Obviously I shouldn't have brought Moore's law into it!
Originally it was 12 months but it's obviously been revised over the years :)
 
My point is that you don't need dazzling HQ architecture to do incredible things as a company. I never "judged" their facility needs, either.

One more thing...you're bold-lock is stuck. ;)

How do you know what Apple needs?

A great space and facility helps a lot when you are trying to recruit the best talent in a tight labor market for scientists and engineers, one that the San Francisco Bay Area suffers from.

Given a choice of putting up a drab, boring office complex that looks like thousands of others in the Bay Area, and a stunning piece of architecture, if you have the money (and Apple does), it's great that a handful of companies will go out on a limb an commission a work of art that also satisfies their facilities objectives. Fortunately Apple is one of them.

Outstanding architecture may not do anything for you personally, but for many others it's a delight, and has a long tradition going back many many years. You may want to consult Art History books to get a better understanding of that.

Apple has needs for enormous amounts of office space, the need to attract the best scientists and engineers, the money, and fortunately for those that appreciate it, the willingness to create something special.

I don't understand why Apple stepping up with a brilliant design bothers you so much.
 
Just watched Stargate SG-1. What does the "spaceship" remind you of? Now ask, why is Elon Musk (the prinicipal behind Apple's rival carmaker Tesla) having so many problem with SpaceX vehicles? Why do so many people on the social media claim to have seen UFOs around SpaceX vehicles? Could it be Apple called in some offworld backup? Wonder why the US government is playing hardball with Apple all of a sudden. Spying. Taxes. Cost of products. Why are so many of Apple's competitor having problems. Microsoft phone. Nokia. Samsung. Kinda eerie coincidences. I'm stocking up on tinfoil.

Can't innovate my *ss. Apple built the ring teleporter from Stargate in front our very eyes. How chump does "vr" look next to near instant matter teleportation?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: alexmarchuk
The sun came up in the east? Ha ha ha. Now pull the other one!
You seem to already know so much about this unfinished catastrophe of a building so do you mind sharing the blueprints or whatever it is you're basing your posts on? I'd really like to take a look (sincerely)
 
Well maybe Apple management will move to the new building and regain their focus on Mac products. Buildings work in mysterious ways!
Typically it take three months for a habit to kick in for a new building. Looking forward to see the new place function.
 
Mathematically perhaps, but not practically. First this calculation works potentially for trips involving the ground floor only. It also assumes that entries are a located everywhere on the ground floor, which of course they are not. Add floors above ground level, which this building has, and the decision on how to route a trip becomes substantially more complex. Add to this, the building will look fundamentally the same from every view angle. This will produce a great deal of disorientation to the decision making process on how to best get from there to here.

Keep stretching!
 
Keep saying nothing so you can't be contradicted!
Ok, i can say something: People, in general, are not so stupid that they cant figure out how to get from A to B in any given building they are familiar with (its not even hard to figure out an A-B route in an unfamiliar building)
 
Originally it was 12 months but it's obviously been revised over the years :)

Moore's law just a bunch of basic physics thrown at it's feet....

There simple is a point were you get to an atomic level with the speed of light playing tricks on you.
Thats why we are seeing more and more cores and extras being cramped into a single chip instead of any real life performance gains per core in the past years.
 
Or you could say it perfectly resembles a ring.
Wonder why this building is constantly described as "circular" when the plan is so clearly a ring.


lol.. what are you on about?

go look at the definition of 'ring'.. i'll give you five bucks if the word 'circle' (or circular etc) isn't included.



----------------------
----------------------
----------------------


edit-
here's a head start for you..


Screen Shot 2016-09-02 at 6.50.19 PM.png

[doublepost=1472857235][/doublepost]
Steve jobs would've never built this.
you're joking, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Campus
""On June 7, 2011, Apple's then-CEO Steve Jobs presented to Cupertino City Council details of the architectural design of the new buildings and their environs. The new campus, on a site now totalling 176 acres (0.71 km2), is planned to house up to 13,000 employees in one central four-storied circular building of approximately 2,800,000 square feet (260,000 m2), which will include a café for 3,000 sitting people, be surrounded by extensive landscaping, and offer parking both underground and in a parking structure. Media reports widely described the new structure as "spaceship".[21] Other facilities include a 1,000 seat auditorium, 300,000 square feet (28,000 m2) of R&D facilities, a fitness center, an orchard, and a dedicated generating plant as the primary source of electricity (powered by natural gas and other more environmentally sound means).[22] Jobs: "It's got a gorgeous courtyard in the middle, and a lot more. It's a circle, so it's curved all the way round. This is not the cheapest way to build something." Every pane of glass in the main building will be curved. This proved to be Jobs' last public appearance before his death in October 2011.""
 
Last edited:
This is where it's useful to understand the difference between a ring and a circular plan. To cut across the diameter of a ring plan building requires exiting and re-entering the building. A person on the 4th floor of the building wishing to meet with a person on the 4th floor on the opposite side of the ring would be forced to take an elevator to the ground floor, leave the building (assuming it isn't raining), cut across the diameter of the building, re-enter as close as possible to their destination, and take another elevator back to the 4th floor. Or walk the half the circumference of the building. The ring is a pretty lousy space-planning device. It will however look awesome from the air.
for perspective, the new campus is 2.8million sq/ft... world trade center was 10million.. for both buildings combined.

or, the apple campus is about 60 floors of one of the WTC buildings.. cupertino is a low rise city with the tallest building being less than 10 floors.

even if they could build the 60 floor tower instead of the current design, getting from ptA to ptB in a high rise is not trivial.. you're complaining about 2 elevator rides at 4 levels each?.. you're going to take 2 or 3 elevators in the high rise for about 20 floors each.. with no practical option to take the stairs instead.

reality is, in the majority of scenarios, a person is going to move throughout the campus in a more efficient manner than they would a tower (or a mall like sprawl)..
and maybe more importantly, they'll likely enjoy the walk through the building when compared to traversing a tower or box.
 
Serious question: How do you get from one side (or extremity) of the building to the other in a reasonable amount of time? Do they have circular, horizontal elevators?

Easy. Walk to the innermost hallway of the ring (which is stationary) and wait for the rest of the building to rotate toward you, bringing your destination closer and closer every moment.
 
It would be cool if they have enough space to setup a full manufacturing line, so they could secretly create a new product category and the machinery to build it, and when it is announced move the blueprints overseas for large scale production within 3 months.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.